I understand the contradiction of a group wanting its members' conduct to be "private" and "treated like everyone else", yet holding a special parade declaring that conduct down the main boulevard of the city. That said, how much good do we accomplish by making comparisons like "the Alcoholic Pride parade" and others? Will anyone on the fence about the issue decide to follow Church teaching based on such commentary? Do such comparisons provide any sort of material that can be used in a debate with friends and co-workers? I think that particular brand of comparison loses more hearts and minds than it gains. The truth of the matter is that supporters of accepting homosexual activity believe with utter sincerity they are doing the right thing. If we fail to acknowledge that sincerity, while firmly making the Scriptural and natural law case for Church teaching, then we will simply get people to shut us out before we've even started.

I recently -- and with trepidation, how sad is that? -- wrote a letter to my adult children explaining to them my views about "marriage equality" -- given that I care about them and the world we inhabit together and into which their future children may be born.

Naturally, I strove to articulate my arguments in such a way that they would not egregiously offend the kids' sensibilities. (They, like so many of their 20-something peers, have been conditioned to reject any viewpoint that would displease a "marriage equality" proponent). However, I decided not to refrain from using the alcoholism analogy because I'm aware that one of the standard arguments for "marriage equality" is that sexual orientation is, for the most part, inborn and therefore not a conscious choice. I think that, at that point, it is entirely reasonable to point out that many harmful tendencies are, arguably, inborn but nevertheless can, and should be, resisted rather than encouraged.

The difficulty is that the kids have been conditioned to reject the idea that sodomy is harmful (I didn't use the word “sodomy” in my letter, because unfortunately my boys and their wives are functionally Scripturally illiterate). That's the concrete that has to be broken through to even get to the ground floor of their ability to think about this, as opposed to respond to it emotionally in the precise way that popular culture and the ethos of the university campus has programmed them to.

The primary point I always try to make in these discussions is not about resisting harmful inborn tendencies. It is that the heterosexual couple is the fundamental social and biological unit without which none of us would exist (HELLO!!!). Am I going to say to anyone I care about -- whether straight or gay -- that it doesn't matter how he or she or I came to be alive to even be having this discussion? That the very mechanism of our existence ought not to be enshrined in our culture? Of course I'm not going to say that.

That was my opening, and I think my strongest, argument. I expect it was quickly rejected in favor of the "but all the poor gay people who love each other" refrain. The "It's really mean of you to say that homosexuality is like alcoholism" refrain would have come later.

But I tried. And, to be fair, I have had no response from the kids. I probably won't get a response unless I press for one, which I don't intend to do. They were raised to be polite and respectful toward their parents, and they always have been. I will be spared the verbal unpleasantness that probably is endured by many mothers and fathers these days who dare to express themselves honestly to their kids about this.

Bryan, I use the alcoholics analogy intentionally because it is usually attributed to an inherent predisposition, just like homosexuality is. Yet no predisposition-- concupiscence, if you will-- excuses the "lifestyle".

But, no worries, the post wasn't intended as a persuasive argument I would make in a serious debate.

I appreciate the elaborations, which have fortunately spurred me to think over my own point some more. To refine it a bit, it really has to do more with how orthodox Catholics sometimes address homosexual activity, especially when using analogies. Oftentimes it seems to me that when orthodox Catholics criticize various gay rights campaigns, it carries a tone of irritation that implies people "know better" but carry on anyway. Actually, I'm more and more convinced that people do not "know better" anymore, so any hint of anger strikes them as simple irrationality. (I realize that for this particular posting you're employing sarcasm as a device, but anything on the internet becomes, for better or worse, an argument in the debate.) Regarding the alcoholism analogy, I agree that the point must be made that behaviors with inborn motivations need not be entertained. The trouble I have comes from imagining how people might receive it. I can only guess how a gay marriage proponent might take it, but it might go something like this: "Homosexual relationships are like alcoholism? Alcoholism does obvious damage. Missed work. Overspending. Broken relationships. Driving accidents. Cirrhosis. I do not see any obvious damage from a relationship, so the analogy is ridiculous." In short, if homosexual activity is damaging in a temporal way, then that has to be elaborated, because it does not seem obvious; I admit that I do not know the research either way. Obviously spiritual damage is the much bigger deal, but the problem is that many (most?) same-sex marriage advocates do not consider the Bible to be a credible guide on the matter; until they are convinced of that, the temporal arguments are what we are left with. It no doubt suffers its own flaws, but I think of an analogy more along the lines of colorblindness. Colorblindness denies one the ability to use sight for one of its basic purposes, detection of color; while that does not detract from the dignity or other qualities of the individual and causes no apparent threat to well-being, no one would refer to it as "alternative vision", nor recommend a totally colorblind person as a muralist, film color technician, or pilot, no matter how much he/she may have dreamed of those roles and how otherwise qualified he/she might be. Similarly, homosexuality leaves the individual unable to use (or severely obstructed from using) the reproductive system for its basic purpose of reproduction; given that the only sensible raison d'etre for civil marriage is as a test of seriousness and a legal reinforcement to couples who might procreate and raise society's future (people here typically raise all sorts of objections around infertility, adoption, etc., but we can get into those another time), same-sex relationships simply cannot fulfill that purpose. I apologize for such an over-worded post. I just think the Church's approach on the topic needs to have subtlety, understanding, and persistence to turn the tide.

Jane, while the letter may not have resulted in a response to you, be assured they are talking about you. Whether you are right or wrong, be wary of letting a little pontificating create (or contribute further to) divisions between you and your adult kids. Stuff like this from mothers and mothers-in-law really helps kids decide which side they'll be spending Christmas with. Self-righteous people are always the loneliest.

Have you ever wondered why God keeps creating people with homosexual attraction? Gays and lesbians are not some product of the 1960s sexual revolution, but have been a small but persistent minority documented across many centuries, many cultures, and all parts of the world. Have you considered that gay and lesbian people might be part of God's plan? If so, you might make a better comparison about why black people have a parade, or why Irish or German people have a parade. Or is it just that anyone who isn't like you must have something wrong with them?

Very funny, but I thought it dipped a toe over the line in the propriety dept. no hard feelings, I hope."

After birthing 10 kids I have learned to "dip" waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more than just "a toe over the line in the propriety dept." No hard feelings, Timman, you are a very good Catholic gentleman but I sure hope one of you guys come to Jane's defense! Where's BRAVEHEART when we women need him?!!

When I've been thinking about this, the most sobering thing is to realize that the reason this absurd "marriage equality" issue ever came about is that men and women in the so-called developed world have abandoned one another. They are in agony and they won't help each other.

A Day That Will Live in Glory

Pray for the Four Cardinals: Burke, Caffarra, Meiser and Brandmuller

“You are the ones who are happy; you who remain within the Church by your Faith, who hold firmly to the foundations of the Faith which has come down to you from Apostolic Tradition. And if an execrable jealousy has tried to shake it on a number of occasions, it has not succeeded. They are the ones who have broken away from it in the present crisis. No one, ever, will prevail against your Faith, beloved Brothers. And we believe that God will give us our churches back some day."